mm/mmap.c: expand_downwards: don't require the gap if !vm_prev

expand_stack(vma) fails if address < stack_guard_gap even if there is no
vma->vm_prev.  I don't think this makes sense, and we didn't do this
before the recent commit 1be7107fbe18 ("mm: larger stack guard gap,
between vmas").

We do not need a gap in this case, any address is fine as long as
security_mmap_addr() doesn't object.

This also simplifies the code, we know that address >= prev->vm_end and
thus underflow is not possible.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
Cc: Larry Woodman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions